Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Clemson Offense
RoadDawg55
Member Posts: 30,405 
We are getting the big WR's and a playmaking TE, but we are missing the Wes Welker move the chains type like Renfrow is.
McClatcher plays that position but he's not really known for his hands. He's a weapon, but he looked bad when he had to adjust or catch in traffic.
For all the talk about Browning's strengths pre snap, Watson was better. If Alabama played man, they went to a pick route or slant/drag for Renfrow or let Williams man up and make a play downfield. And water is wet but a running QB that is able to get a few yards by running under duress really fucking helps.
Alabama played cover two and Watson hit the big TE in between the zone.
Alabama could play us straight up, get us in third and long and send pressure that the OL wouldn't pick up or Browning would simply crack. Clemson had Alabama winded but they also had them playing different defense that Watson was able to read and exploit.
McClatcher plays that position but he's not really known for his hands. He's a weapon, but he looked bad when he had to adjust or catch in traffic.
For all the talk about Browning's strengths pre snap, Watson was better. If Alabama played man, they went to a pick route or slant/drag for Renfrow or let Williams man up and make a play downfield. And water is wet but a running QB that is able to get a few yards by running under duress really fucking helps.
Alabama played cover two and Watson hit the big TE in between the zone.
Alabama could play us straight up, get us in third and long and send pressure that the OL wouldn't pick up or Browning would simply crack. Clemson had Alabama winded but they also had them playing different defense that Watson was able to read and exploit.
Comments
-
Clemson is better than UW.
Enough said about that. -
Yeah, they played down to their competition too often, but DDY was right about them.HuskyJW said:Clemson is better than UW.
Enough said about that. -
Mods, can we sticky this poast?!?1 @DerekJohnson @CheersWestDawg @ModsRoadDawg55 said:
Yeah, they played down to their competition too often, but DDY was right about them.HuskyJW said:Clemson is better than UW.
Enough said about that. -
We are also missing the great QB and most of the OL.
-
I know there are a bunch of spread haters on this board, but that is what a well-designed and executed hurry-up, no-huddle spread offense with a quality dual-threat QB does.RoadDawg55 said:For all the talk about Browning's strengths pre snap, Watson was better. If Alabama played man, they went to a pick route or slant/drag for Renfrow or let Williams man up and make a play downfield. And water is wet but a running QB that is able to get a few yards by running under duress really fucking helps.
The combination of pace, personnel and formations forces the defense to play fairly vanilla. The spacing also allows reads and RPOs to be keyed off a single guy in space, which makes it that much easier for a QB to make pre-snap and post-snap decisions.
A shitty spread offense is no better than a shitty pro-style, wishbone or whatever. But a really good spread offense is very tough to beat, especially now that there have been enough tactical innovations in spread football to achieve a real downhill, power running game out of those personnel packages and formations.
Clearly Petersen's offense incorporates some of these things, but doesn't really commit to them either.
-
I've never seen a team with so many white guys and so many small people perform so well.
-
It's ok, no need to mention me as a mod. I know who appreciates my hard work on this bored.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Mods, can we sticky this poast?!?1 @DerekJohnson @CheersWestDawg @ModsRoadDawg55 said:
Yeah, they played down to their competition too often, but DDY was right about them.HuskyJW said:Clemson is better than UW.
Enough said about that. -
I like how Petersen doesn't play hurry up. I don't like what it does to defenses.AIRWOLF said:
I know there are a bunch of spread haters on this board, but that is what a well-designed and executed hurry-up, no-huddle spread offense with a quality dual-threat QB does.RoadDawg55 said:For all the talk about Browning's strengths pre snap, Watson was better. If Alabama played man, they went to a pick route or slant/drag for Renfrow or let Williams man up and make a play downfield. And water is wet but a running QB that is able to get a few yards by running under duress really fucking helps.
The combination of pace, personnel and formations forces the defense to play fairly vanilla. The spacing also allows reads and RPOs to be keyed off a single guy in space, which makes it that much easier for a QB to make pre-snap and post-snap decisions.
A shitty spread offense is no better than a shitty pro-style, wishbone or whatever. But a really good spread offense is very tough to beat, especially now that there have been enough tactical innovations in spread football to achieve a real downhill, power running game out of those personnel packages and formations.
Clearly Petersen's offense incorporates some of these things, but doesn't really commit to them either.
A shitty offense is a shitty offense. Plenty of spreads are horrible dink and dunk bullshit.
Clemson and Auburn with Newton really had the only spread offenses I like. Oklahoma has a pretty good one too. Oregon's was good but didn't bring enough of the power element. -
The versions of Oregon's spread with LaMike and Darron Thomas brought the power. Those were good teams that went in and humiliated Stanford at home and ran the ball down everyone's throat. With the running stats those teams had, it's a huge stretch to dream that it was all finesse and smoke and mirrors. Early Chip was pretty solid.RoadDawg55 said:
I like how Petersen doesn't play hurry up. I don't like what it does to defenses.AIRWOLF said:
I know there are a bunch of spread haters on this board, but that is what a well-designed and executed hurry-up, no-huddle spread offense with a quality dual-threat QB does.RoadDawg55 said:For all the talk about Browning's strengths pre snap, Watson was better. If Alabama played man, they went to a pick route or slant/drag for Renfrow or let Williams man up and make a play downfield. And water is wet but a running QB that is able to get a few yards by running under duress really fucking helps.
The combination of pace, personnel and formations forces the defense to play fairly vanilla. The spacing also allows reads and RPOs to be keyed off a single guy in space, which makes it that much easier for a QB to make pre-snap and post-snap decisions.
A shitty spread offense is no better than a shitty pro-style, wishbone or whatever. But a really good spread offense is very tough to beat, especially now that there have been enough tactical innovations in spread football to achieve a real downhill, power running game out of those personnel packages and formations.
Clearly Petersen's offense incorporates some of these things, but doesn't really commit to them either.
A shitty offense is a shitty offense. Plenty of spreads are horrible dink and dunk bullshit.
Clemson and Auburn with Newton really had the only spread offenses I like. Oklahoma has a pretty good one too. Oregon's was good but didn't bring enough of the power element. -
Their team speed beat Stanford more than power. Zone read and outside zone isn't really power football.creepycoug said:
The versions of Oregon's spread with LaMike and Darron Thomas brought the power. Those were good teams that went in and humiliated Stanford at home and ran the ball down everyone's throat. With the running stats those teams had, it's a huge stretch to dream that it was all finesse and smoke and mirrors. Early Chip was pretty solid.RoadDawg55 said:
I like how Petersen doesn't play hurry up. I don't like what it does to defenses.AIRWOLF said:
I know there are a bunch of spread haters on this board, but that is what a well-designed and executed hurry-up, no-huddle spread offense with a quality dual-threat QB does.RoadDawg55 said:For all the talk about Browning's strengths pre snap, Watson was better. If Alabama played man, they went to a pick route or slant/drag for Renfrow or let Williams man up and make a play downfield. And water is wet but a running QB that is able to get a few yards by running under duress really fucking helps.
The combination of pace, personnel and formations forces the defense to play fairly vanilla. The spacing also allows reads and RPOs to be keyed off a single guy in space, which makes it that much easier for a QB to make pre-snap and post-snap decisions.
A shitty spread offense is no better than a shitty pro-style, wishbone or whatever. But a really good spread offense is very tough to beat, especially now that there have been enough tactical innovations in spread football to achieve a real downhill, power running game out of those personnel packages and formations.
Clearly Petersen's offense incorporates some of these things, but doesn't really commit to them either.
A shitty offense is a shitty offense. Plenty of spreads are horrible dink and dunk bullshit.
Clemson and Auburn with Newton really had the only spread offenses I like. Oklahoma has a pretty good one too. Oregon's was good but didn't bring enough of the power element.
They were really good. They weren't powerful.
